The Granularity Paradox

Classic Project Management theory dictates that sound planning requires a granular work definition, down to tasks that are no more than 4 hours long.  While this is certainly a key component to believable task estimates, it creates an interesting dilemma for project managers using traditional "Gantt Chart" planning tools.  

In practice, project tasks are rarely managed on such a granular level.  It's impractical.  For example, consider a task assignment for writing a design document.  The classic approach would break the assignment down into an ordered series of smaller tasks that few experienced analysts would actually follow.  In fact, it may be impossible to determine these actual steps until the analyst is well into the exercise.

So, if you leave the estimate and task definition at 150 hours, it's impossible to buy into the estimate.  If you break the work down into smaller tasks and achieve a 'believable' estimate, it becomes very unlikely that the plan will be followed or managed at that level of granularity.

The One Task List approach calls for task plans that are as detailed as possible while guaranteed to be followed, managed, and maintained.  It helps to ensure that the planning effort is always adding value.  This clears the way for the teams to be self-managed in the finer details of their work (i.e. how they do their jobs), giving them latitude and empowerment within the rigid structure of a higher level plan.   

>>>Next: The 7 Habits of One Task List